Joan Mwaniki, A200 224 423 (BIA May 29, 2014)

In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) granted an appeal filed by the Department of Homeland Security of an immigration judge’s decision to terminate proceedings without prejudice rather than grant a joint request for administrative closure. The Board noted that the respondent did not oppose the DHS appeal, and stated that joint motions should ordinarily be granted. The decision was written by Member David Holmes and joined by Member Neil Miller and Member Molly Kendall-Clark.

In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) granted an appeal filed by the Department of Homeland Security of an immigration judge’s decision to terminate proceedings without prejudice rather than grant a joint request for administrative closure. The Board noted that the respondent did not oppose the DHS appeal, and stated that joint motions should ordinarily be granted. The decision was written by Member David Holmes and joined by Member Neil Miller and Member Molly Kendall-Clark.

This case is bere the Bad. i an nusual procedural cotext The Deaent of Homeland Secuity DHS) ha appealed om the Imigration udge's ach 25, 213, decision enying the pis' joitly led motion to adminisatively close the proceedigs Te paies have also led a "oint Notice of NonOpposition to HS Apeal and ntnt to ile a Joint Bref, in which the respondent states that she does not oppose the DS's appal and the paries reiterate that both the respondet and HS agee that adminisative closre is h best corse of action in tese proceedings} Th pies indicat their itent to le a oint brief in suppo of the DHS's appeal The appeal will be sustained Wile these poceedings wer ogoig bere the Immition Judge, the pies ed a joint motio to admiisativly close the proceedings The Iigration Judge oted that he was not obliged to at the oint motion, and instead ented a order teinatig the proceedings without preudice While the Imigration Judge was coct that he had the autority to decine to t a joint motion, he did not have the authority to instead teinate the procedigs Absent a lega basis on which to termiate the proceedings, or he goveet's ageement to do so in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion, he mmiation Judg could not simly teinate the poceedigs based on his view that terminatio of the proceedings without preudice was a more appropriate resolution of the poceedings  adiisative cosre